Many “traditional” Christians believe Donald Trump was liken to King David. Does Newt Gingrich believe Trump was the embodiment of David – a royal person? There is no real evidence David existed. In this citation you can read about the doubts modern scholars have about Saul being a king, and the role of Samuel as a ‘king maker’. For Newt Gingrich to say Christians will fight if they are pushed into a corner – some more – is a new call for a Holy and Royal Insurrection that has to be addressed, as there exist new history about Insurectionists attacking our Capitol. Many Biblical paintings depict people with weapons in their hand! Has anyone counted the weapons?
There is a vote going on about the Second Amendment. Newt Gingrich said the call for Gay Rights will lead to a armed conflict. Has anyone counted the DEAD PEOPLE in the Bible. If not, can I get a volunteer? It is not “traditional” to declare Believers will go to war with Non-Believers – in America! Gingrich has declared a Holy Jihad in the minds of many. He is The Pious American Taliban – who did not serve in the military!
“Some avowedly pious men and women have, of late, explained their support of President Donald Trump by citing the example of King David, a sinner whom the Lord used for his purposes, and whose faults—crimes, even—were redeemed by the good he did. According to this line of thinking advanced by politicians, activists, and even clerics of different hues, Trump may have wandered far from the straight path, but he is nonetheless doing God’s work.”
There are several textual or narrative issues in the text, including the aforementioned conflicting accounts of Saul’s rise to kingship and his death, as well as plays on words, that biblical scholars have discussed.
The birth-narrative of the prophet Samuel is found at 1 Samuel 1–28. It describes how Samuel’s mother Hannah requests a son from Yahweh, and dedicates the child to God at the shrine of Shiloh. The passage makes extensive play with the root-elements of Saul’s name, and ends with the phrase hu sa’ul le-Yahweh, “he is dedicated to Yahweh.” Hannah names the resulting son Samuel, giving as her explanation, “because from God I requested him.” Samuel’s name, however, can mean “name of God,” (or “Heard of God” or “Told of God”) and the etymology and multiple references to the root of the name seems to fit Saul instead. The majority explanation for the discrepancy is that the narrative originally described the birth of Saul, and was given to Samuel in order to enhance the position of David and Samuel at the former king’s expense.
The Bible’s tone with regard to Saul changes over the course of the narrative, especially around the passage where David appears, midway through 1 Samuel. Before, Saul is presented in positive terms, but afterward his mode of ecstatic prophecy is suddenly described as fits of madness, his errors and disobedience to Samuel’s instructions are stressed and he becomes a paranoiac. This may indicate that the David story is inserted from a source loyal to the House of David; David’s lament over Saul in 2 Samuel 1 then serves an apologetic purpose, clearing David of the blame for Saul’s death.
God’s change of mind in rejecting Saul as king has raised questions about God’s “repentance”, which would be inconsistent with God’s immutability.
In the narrative of Saul’s private anointing in 1 Samuel 9:1-10:16, Saul is not referred to as a king (melech), but rather as a “leader” or “commander” (nagid) Saul is only given the title “king” (melech) at the public coronation ceremony at Gilgal.
Various authors have attempted to harmonize the two narratives regarding Saul’s death. Josephus writes that Saul’s attempted suicide was stalled because he was not able to run the sword through himself, and that he therefore asked the Amalekite to finish it.